Cittamattra/Yogachara - how to purify the latent seeds?

[kirtu]

How are the latent seeds deposited in the alayavijnana purified in the Cittamatra/Yogachara schools ?

Thanks!

Kirt

[Jnana]

How are the latent seeds deposited in the alayavijnana purified in the Cittamatra/Yogachara schools ?

Hi Kirt,

The short answer is that one hears and reflects upon the dharma, then develops the first 29 of the 37 factors of awakening to the degree necessary to penetrate the four noble truths, and then further develops these and the remaining 8 factors of awakening (i.e. the noble eightfold path) by practicing calm abiding and clear seeing on the path of meditative development until the ālayavijñāna has been eliminated.

A slightly longer answer is as follows....

The ālayavijñāna is the root of all defilements, and the ālayavijñāna is eliminated through the revolution of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti).

The ālayavijñāna ceases through the development of skillful dharmas (kuśala-dharma-bhāvanā). These are the seeds of the skillful roots conducive to liberation and conducive to penetrating insight. In short, they are the four applications of mindfulness and the rest of the 37 factors of awakening (bodhipākṣika-dharmā).

First the yogī hears the mahāyāna dharma and then reflects upon what has been heard. Then s/he maintains appropriate ethical conduct, and develops calm abiding and clear seeing until successfully penetrating the four noble truths at the time of attaining the path of seeing (darśanamārga). The complete revolution of the basis then begins on the path of meditative development (bhāvanāmārga) by repeatedly entering into meditative equipoise which takes suchness (tathatā) as the object-support (ālambana).

All the best,

Geoff

[Indrajala]

The ālayavijñāna is the root of all defilements, and the ālayavijñāna is eliminated through the revolution of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti).

It is interesting that you would say the ālayavijñāna is the root of all defilements. This was actually an issue in East Asian Buddhism for some time. The discussion concerned whether or not the ālayavijñāna is ultimately defiled or not. It was basically an issue of seeing it in a positive or negative light. Furthermore, the tathāgatagarbha is equated to the ālāyavijñāna in various key texts such as the Laṅkâvatāra Sūtra 《楞伽經》 and the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna 《大乘起信論》. The tathāgatagarbha in the Foxinglun 《佛性論》 is defined as all sentient beings collectively. In that sense the question arises for soteriological purposes what is the quality of the ālayavijñāna?

Discussion about the ālayavijñāna weighed heavily in scholastic debate amongst Buddhists in China in the sixth century. The problem is that they did not have a full corpus of Yogācāra texts at the time. They did however have Bodhiruci's translation of Vasubandhu's commentary on the Daśabhūmika-sūtra. The commentary text has a few references to the ālayavijñāna while the original sūtra itself does not. In any case, two of Vasubandhu's references imply that the ālayavijñāna is the source of delusion while three imply that it is the source of enlightenment. The fourth reference associates the ālayavijñāna with suchness (tathātā).

Thus the question arises: is the ālayavijñāna identical with suchness (tathātā) in which case is it intrinsically pure and free from defilements? The Daśabhūmika insists that the world is created by a "one mind" and thus another question bears additional consideration: is the ultimate basis of the phenomenal world pure or defiled?

In this light your statement...

The complete revolution of the basis then begins on the path of meditative development (bhāvanāmārga) by repeatedly entering into meditative equipoise which takes suchness (tathatā) as the object-support (ālambana).

... might attract a question: if the ālayavijñāna is based on tathatā, then how is it really defiled as you insist above?

[Jnana]

Thus the question arises: is the ālayavijñāna identical with suchness (tathātā) in which case is it intrinsically pure and free from defilements? The Daśabhūmika insists that the world is created by a "one mind" and thus another question bears additional consideration: is the ultimate basis of the phenomenal world pure or defiled?

In this light your statement...

The complete revolution of the basis then begins on the path of meditative development (bhāvanāmārga) by repeatedly entering into meditative equipoise which takes suchness (tathatā) as the object-support (ālambana).

... might attract a question: if the ālayavijñāna is based on tathatā, then how is it really defiled as you insist above?

Hi Huseng,

As you know, this can become a complex discussion pretty quickly. There have been various interpretations regarding the ālayavijñāna over the centuries in India, China, Tibet, etc.

What I said above is basically a paraphrase of a couple of sections of the Viniścayasaṃgrahanī from the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra, which is consistent with the Madhyāntavibhāgabhāsya and the Mahāyānasaṃgraha on through to the treatises of Karmapa Rangjung Dorje.

I recognize that there are different interpretations to be found in some Chinese sources.

I will post some source quotations from the Viniścayasaṃgrahanī tomorrow.

All the best,

Geoff

[Jnana]

In this light your statement...

The complete revolution of the basis then begins on the path of meditative development (bhāvanāmārga) by repeatedly entering into meditative equipoise which takes suchness (tathatā) as the object-support (ālambana).

... might attract a question: if the ālayavijñāna is based on tathatā, then how is it really defiled as you insist above?

Some relevant excerpts from the Viniścayasaṃgrahanī of the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra:

What is establishing the cessation of defilements?

(5.b) A. Briefly, ālaya-vijñana is the root of all defiled [dharmas]. Accordingly:

(5.b) A.1. It is the root of the coming-about of the animate world (sattva-loka) because [it] is what brings forth the sense-faculties with their material bases (sādhi hānam indriyam) and the [forms of] arising cognitive awareness.

(5.b) A.2. [It] also is the root of the coming-about of the receptacle (i.e. inanimate) world (bhājana-loka), because [it] is what brings forth the receptacle world.

(5.b) A.3. Moreover, because all sentient beings mutually condition (anyonya-adhipatyāt) each other, [it] is also the root of sentient beings acting upon each other. This is because there are no sentient beings at all who would not experience pleasure (sukha) and pain (dukkha), etc., by seeing, [hearing, tasting], etc. other sentient beings. In this way, one should understand that the world of sentient beings (sattva-dhātu) is mutually conditioned.

(5.b) A.4. Thus, because this very ālaya-vijñāna is what has all the seeds (sarvabījaka) it:

(a) is the nature (svabhāva) of the Truth of Suffering (dukkha-satya) in the present;

(b) is that which brings about (utpādaka) the Truth of Suffering in the future;

(c) and [it] is also that which brings about the Truth of Origin (samudaya-satya) in the present.

(5.b) A.5. In this way one should understand that ālaya-vijñāna is the root of all that is defiled, by being that which creates (nirvataka) the animate world [1.3.], that which creates the receptacle world [2.], the nature of the Truth of Suffering [4(a)], that which creates the Truth of Suffering in the future [4(b)], and that which creates the Truth of Origin in the present [4.(c)].

Regarding beings who have and have not eliminated the ālayavijñāna the same text states:

Do those who have ālaya-vijñāna also have the [six forms of] arising cognitive awareness, and do those who have the [six forms of] arising cognitive awareness also have ālaya-vijñāna?

There are four possibilities:

(a) those who have ālaya-vijñāna without the [six forms of] arising cognitive awareness are those who are in unconscious sleep (acittamid-dham), mind-less unconsciousness (acittakā-mūrcchā), who have attained the attainment without apperception (asamjñī-samāpatti) and the attainment of cessation (nirodha-samāpatti), and those who are born in [the realm of] sentient beings without apperception.

(b) those who have the [six forms of] arising cognitive awareness but do not have ālaya-vijñāna are Arhats, Pratyekabuddhas, irreversible (avinivartanīya) Bodhisattvas, or a Tathāgata in conscious states (sacittakāvasthā).

(c) those who have both [the six forms of cognitive awareness and ālaya-vijñāna] are those in conscious states other than those [mentioned above].

(d) those who have neither are Arhats, Pratyekabuddhas, irreversible Bodhisattvas, or a Tathāgata in the attainment of cessation, or those in the realm of nirvāna without remainder (nirupadhiśe a-nirvānadhātu).

Thus the question arises: is the ālayavijñāna identical with suchness (tathātā) in which case is it intrinsically pure and free from defilements?

The other-dependent nature is the basis (āśraya) of both defilement and purification. The ālayavijñāna is the defiled portion (saṃkleśa-bhāga) of the other-dependent nature. Purified suchness (tathatā-viśuddhā) is the purified portion (vyavadāna-bhāga) of the other-dependent nature. Synonyms for purified suchness are the perfected nature (pariniṣpanna), purified dharmadhātu (dharmadhātu-viśuddhā), undefiled dhātu (anāsrava-dhātu), nonabiding nirvāṇa (apratiṣṭha-nirvāṇa), dharmakāya. The cognizance itself is nonconceptual gnosis (nirvikalpa-jñāna), which takes suchness as its object-support (ālambana). Mahāyānasaṃgraha 9.1:

The bodhisattvas' elimination (prahāṇa) is nonabiding nirvāṇa. Its identity is the revolved basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti), [revolved into] a basis (āśraya) that has eliminated defilement (kleśa) without abandoning saṃsāra.

Saṃsāra comprises the defiled portion of the other-dependent nature. Nirvāṇa comprises the purified portion of it. The basis (āśraya) is the other-dependent nature which comprises both [defiled and purified portions].

Revolution (parāvṛtti) is the other-dependent nature when the antidote [to defilements] has occurred and has purged its defiled portion, reducing it to its purified portion.

[Indrajala]

Yeshe D.

As you know, this can become a complex discussion pretty quickly. There have been various interpretations regarding the ālayavijñāna over the centuries in India, China, Tibet, etc.

Indeed. Some scholars think early Chinese thinkers were not sufficiently versed in Indian texts to grasp the ālayavijñāna theories on their own terms. I know when Xuanzang returned from his trip abroad to India he set about rectifying what he saw as erroneous theories about the ālayavijñāna among other topics. However, not everyone agreed with him and certain lineages like Huayan, which had their roots in the Dilun-zong 地論宗 (an East Asian school that focused on the Daśabhūmika-śāstra), seem to have generally defended the old interpretations.

Thank you for providing the extensive quotation. This is indeed highly advanced Buddhology and while I have some experience studying such topics I am by no means an expert, but hopefully this discussion will bear fruits of insight for everyone.

The other-dependent nature is the basis (āśraya) of both defilement and purification. The ālayavijñāna is the defiled portion (saṃkleśa-bhāga) of the other-dependent nature. Purified suchness (tathatā-viśuddhā) is the purified portion (vyavadāna-bhāga) of the other-dependent nature. Synonyms for purified suchness are the perfected nature (pariniṣpanna), purified dharmadhātu (dharmadhātu-viśuddhā), undefiled dhātu (anāsrava-dhātu), nonabiding nirvāṇa (apratiṣṭha-nirvāṇa), dharmakāya. The cognizance itself is nonconceptual gnosis (nirvikalpa-jñāna), which takes suchness as its object-support (ālambana).

I think the difference in interpretation with some East Asian schools is how the term tathatā is defined and employed. For example in a text I have been studying as of late, the Treatise on Buddha Nature or Foxinglun 《佛性論》, which is said to be a translation of an Indian text but no such text is known to be extant either in Sanskrit, Tibetan or any other language, tathatā is equated with śūnyatā. In that sense śūnyatā cannot really be defiled as it is the principle of causality itself.

However, just judging from this quote here the idea seems to be that tathatā is something either cognized or experienced. If tathatā was regarded as a principle of all causality, how could you have purified and defiled portions? The difference seems to be that the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra suggests an epistemological meaning for tathatā while in the Treatise on Buddha Nature the definition of the term is clearly ontological.

Let me illustrate what I am saying. Here Buddha-nature is aligned with tathatā:

佛性者。即是人法二空所顯真如。
Buddha-nature is the suchness (tathatā) revealed through the two emptinesses of person and phenomenon.

Buddha-nature is then equated with emptiness as a causal process which allows for sentient beings and likewise Buddhas to arise:

若汝謂有眾生無佛性者。既無空性。則無無明。若無無明。則無業報。既無業報。眾生豈有。
If you think that there are sentient beings without buddha-nature, then as there would be no emptiness-nature, and therefore no ignorance. If there is no ignorance, then there would be no karma and retribution – as there would be no karma and retribution, how could sentient beings exist?

In this sense tathatā is clearly being utilized ontologically. In the aforementioned is said to be either purified or defiled. Now does that mean the causal process towards realization is purified or defiled, I wonder?

[kirtu]

How are the latent seeds deposited in the alayavijnana purified in the Cittamatra/Yogachara schools ?

The short answer is that one hears and reflects upon the dharma, then develops the first 29 of the 37 factors of awakening to the degree necessary to penetrate the four noble truths, and then further develops these and the remaining 8 factors of awakening (i.e. the noble eightfold path) by practicing calm abiding and clear seeing on the path of meditative development until the ālayavijñāna has been eliminated.

Yeshe - that's sort of the long answer .... and anyway I'm looking for magical means of attainment of course .... enough of this endless contemplation stuff ....

A slightly longer answer is as follows....

The ālayavijñāna is the root of all defilements, and the ālayavijñāna is eliminated through the revolution of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti).

and how ?

The ālayavijñāna ceases through the development of skillful dharmas (kuśala-dharma-bhāvanā). These are the seeds of the skillful roots conducive to liberation and conducive to penetrating insight. In short, they are the four applications of mindfulness and the rest of the 37 factors of awakening (bodhipākṣika-dharmā).

Exactly BUT the development of skillful dharmas should not result in the cessation of the alayavijnana - it should result in adding skillful latent seeds to the alaya but won't destroy the unskillful seeds currently present. That's a problem.

The complete revolution of the basis then begins on the path of meditative development (bhāvanāmārga) by repeatedly entering into meditative equipoise which takes suchness (tathatā) as the object-support (ālambana).

However meditation may well destroy them .... is there sutric support for that mechanism? Does Vasubandhu address this?

Kirt

[conebeckham]

Kirt-

According to the Karma Kagyu, it is not "normal" prajna that can "purify" the latent seeds. (I know you're asking about "classical yogacara/cittamatra," and Rangjung Dorje's view may differ in several respects...but anyway.....)

The purification of the Alaya can only occur with the Vajra-Like Samadhi. At that time, the Alaya becomes the Mirror-like Wisdom. In other words, it is not that we "remove" the seeds, or that we have to worrry about planting "virtuous seeds." It is a change of state.

[kirtu]

Kirt-

According to the Karma Kagyu, it is not "normal" prajna that can "purify" the latent seeds. (I know you're asking about "classical yogacara/cittamatra," and Rangjung Dorje's view may differ in several respects...but anyway.....)

The purification of the Alaya can only occur with the Vajra-Like Samadhi. At that time, the Alaya becomes the Mirror-like Wisdom. In other words, it is not that we "remove" the seeds, or that we have to worrry about planting "virtuous seeds." It is a change of state.

Sure but the Tibetan masters did not throw sutra out wholesale so Rangjung Dorje's view may be directly justifiable on sutric grounds (rather than on tantric or yogic grounds for example). So the assertion is that Vajra-Like Samadhi directly transforms the alaya itself ? or the seeds ? What exactly is Vajra-Like Samadhi?

Did Rangjung Dorje teach or write on this?

Thanks!

Kirt

[Jnana]

For example in a text I have been studying as of late, the Treatise on Buddha Nature or Foxinglun 《佛性論》,... tathatā is equated with śūnyatā. In that sense śūnyatā cannot really be defiled as it is the principle of causality itself.

Yes, śūnyatā, dharmatā, and tattva are also given as synonyms for tathatā in the Indian Yogācāra treatises. Also, the imaginary nature and the defiled portion of the other-dependent nature are both always unreal imagination (abhūta-parikalpa). Illusory appearance of duality (i.e. imaginary nature) is caused by the basis for such epistemological errors (i.e. the defiled portion of the other-dependent nature). Neither of these two natures (i.e. the imaginary nature and the defiled portion of the other dependent nature) are ontologically grounded in reality (tattva, tathatā, dharmatā, dharmadhātu, etc.).

An important aspect of the Yogācāra teachings in this regard is the innate, luminous purity of the mind (citta prakṛtiprabhāsvara; citta-prakṛtiviśuddhi). In reality, the mind is innately pure and all obscurations are adventitious. The practices of the path just remove the stains which cover and obscure this purity.

For example, at the end of the Dharmadharmatāvibhāgavṛtti we find:

Although [upon full awakening] there has been a revolution of the basis (āśrayaparivṛtti), nothing has undergone an actual change. How this is the case is demonstrated by the analogies [of the sky, gold, water, etc., in the root text]....

For example, intrinsically, the sky is just pure. But it is not considered so when it is clouded over by mist, etc., which are adventitious to it. When it is free of that [mist, etc.] it is then [considered] pure.... The purity is not originated. Rather the purity is just [newly] seen when it has become free of what prevented it from being seen. The fact that the sky is [now] perceived to be pure does not mean that it should be taken as something which has undergone change.

Likewise, gold exists simply in its own splendor. But when its luster is hidden by adventitious stain one does not perceive [its splendor], and when it is freed from the stain its [splendor] is perceived. That is all. By perceiving [the splendor of the gold], one is not creating it.

Similarly, water exists simply in its own sparkling clarity. But the water, through its association with mud, is not perceived as [clear]. And when freed from the mud it is perceived [as such]. That is all. Perceiving it as such does not cause the substance of the water, which has been continually present, to generate [clarity], nor is that [clarity] created. One should not take the water to be something that has undergone change just because one [now] perceives its clarity.

In the same way, the innate luminosity (prakṛti prabhāsvara) in the revolved basis (āśrayaparivṛtti) is not previously nonexistent. Rather, through the appearance of adventitious obscurations it did not appear, just like the impurity [in the above analogy of the sky], the lack of splendor [in the analogy of gold], and the lack of clarity [in the analogy of water]. That is all. When the [innate luminosity] is freed from those [obscurations] it appears. From this, through that revolution, the real nature (dharmatā) comes to appear; but by its appearing it is not [newly] generated, nor is it created. Because there is no [creation] of it, the real nature (dharmatā) and the revolved basis consisting of it (tadprabhāvitāśrayaparivṛtti) are constant (nitya).

This view is also expressed in terms of the tathāgatagarbha in the Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā.

However, just judging from this quote here the idea seems to be that tathatā is something either cognized or experienced. If tathatā was regarded as a principle of all causality, how could you have purified and defiled portions? The difference seems to be that the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra suggests an epistemological meaning for tathatā while in the Treatise on Buddha Nature the definition of the term is clearly ontological.

Yes.

BTW, I had a look at your Huayan site the other day. Very good stuff. We always need more translators!

[Jnana]

However meditation may well destroy them .... is there sutric support for that mechanism? Does Vasubandhu address this?

Kirt, later I'll try to add to what Conebeckham has already said....

[Jnana]

The ālayavijñāna is the root of all defilements, and the ālayavijñāna is eliminated through the revolution of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti).

and how ?

From the Viniścayasaṃgrahanī:

The ālaya-vijñāna, which holds the seeds of the skillful roots (kuśala-mūla) conducive to liberation (moksa-bhāgīya) and conducive to penetrating insight (nirvedha-bhāgīya), is [however] not the cause (hetu) of the Truth of Origin, because those skillful roots conducive to liberation, etc., are indeed impediments (virodhatva) to the arising [of defilements].

If these [skillful roots] do occur, other mundane skillful roots will become very clear, and therefore they will have greater capacity (sāmarthyavattara) to uphold their own seeds and will have greater strength towards [their own future] realization through having nurtured [those very] seeds. Skillful dharmas from those seeds will in turn become clearer, and subsequently more desirable and more pleasant results (vipāka) will also be realized....

In cultivating skillful dharmas, ordinary people fix [their] minds (manaskāra) to the [forms of] arising cognitive awareness as an objective support in order to stabilize their minds, cultivating [these dharmas] in order to attain (praveśana) complete understanding of the [Four] Truths (satyābhisamaya) for the first time. [This is] because those who have not yet seen the Truths, who have not obtained vision into the [Four] Truths, cannot penetrate (*pratividh-) the ālaya-vijñāna which has all the seeds, either....

[Then,] because ālaya-vijñāna is the constituent element (dhātukatva) of all the kinds of karmic formations (samskārā) comprised in proliferation (prapañca), [the practitioner] makes [them] into one collection, one heap, one hoard in the ālaya-vijñāna. Having collected [them all] into one, he revolves the basis (āśrayaparivartate) by the cause of assiduous cultivation of the wisdom (jñāna) which takes true reality (tathatā) as an objective support. As the basis is revolved, ālaya-vijñāna must be said to have been abandoned; because it has been abandoned, it must be said that all the defilements also have been abandoned.

One should know that the revolution of the basis impedes (virodha) and so counteracts (pratipakṣa) ālaya-vijñāna.

The ālayavijñāna ceases through the development of skillful dharmas (kuśala-dharma-bhāvanā). These are the seeds of the skillful roots conducive to liberation and conducive to penetrating insight. In short, they are the four applications of mindfulness and the rest of the 37 factors of awakening (bodhipākṣika-dharmā).

Exactly BUT the development of skillful dharmas should not result in the cessation of the alayavijnana - it should result in adding skillful latent seeds to the alaya but won't destroy the unskillful seeds currently present. That's a problem.

Well, these aren't apple seeds. We're talking about a metaphor for mental processes, so there is no problem at all.

Does Vasubandhu address this?

In Chapter Four of the Madhyāntavibhāgabhāsya he explains the five paths in terms of the 37 factors of awakening, and in Chapter Five in the specific mahāyāna context of calm abiding (śamatha) and clear seeing (vipaśyanā).

Regarding the vajropamasamādhi, the Abhidharmasamuccaya explains:

What is the diamond-like meditative stabilization (vajropamasamādhi)? It is the concentration comprising the path of application (prayogamārga) or the immediate path (ānantaryamārga) on the occasion of the abandonment of the fetters (saṃyojana) in a person after his entry into the path of cultivation (bhāvanāmārga). The inclusion of the path of application shows that henceforth this concentration cannot be hidden by the obstacles (āvaraṇa) and that it can overcome all the obstacles. The inclusion of the immediate path indicates the immediate appearance of the knowledge of the exhaustion of the defilements (kṣayajñāna) and of the knowledge of the non-appearance of the abandoned defilements (anutpādajñāna).

[conebeckham]

Sure but the Tibetan masters did not throw sutra out wholesale so Rangjung Dorje's view may be directly justifiable on sutric grounds (rather than on tantric or yogic grounds for example). So the assertion is that Vajra-Like Samadhi directly transforms the alaya itself ? or the seeds ? What exactly is Vajra-Like Samadhi?

Did Rangjung Dorje teach or write on this?

Well...yes, he taught this. It's really a central point of the Zabmo Nangdon, actually.....and I think, though I'm not sure, that it is a synthesis of sutra and tantra, and that it comes from Karmapa's meditation experience as well.

As for what the Vajra-Like Samadhi is, I'll have to get back to ya....

Check out Luminous Heart, though...

[kirtu]

Sure but the Tibetan masters did not throw sutra out wholesale so Rangjung Dorje's view may be directly justifiable on sutric grounds (rather than on tantric or yogic grounds for example). So the assertion is that Vajra-Like Samadhi directly transforms the alaya itself ? or the seeds ? What exactly is Vajra-Like Samadhi?

Did Rangjung Dorje teach or write on this?/quote]

Well...yes, he taught this. It's really a central point of the Zabmo Nangdon, actually.....and I think, though I'm not sure, that it is a synthesis of sutra and tantra, and that it comes from Karmapa's meditation experience as well.

As for what the Vajra-Like Samadhi is, I'll have to get back to ya....

Check out Luminous Heart, though...

Thanks! The Zabmo Nangdon is in some state of translation as far as I can tell. Luminous Heart is one f those texts I never got around to. I think I still have it though so I will check it out.

Kirt

[kalden yungdrung]

How are the latent seeds deposited in the alayavijnana purified in the Cittamatra/Yogachara schools ?

Thanks!

Kirt

Tashi delek Kirtu,

According Cittamatra i do not know so precisely because i am not so wellknown in Mahayana.

But i guess that Cittamatra has its power more in the philosphy than in the praxis.
Its main point of view would be that everything is mind only and that over this mind of delusion, enlightenment is possible.

So in Mahayana the base is:
- a Sutra or philosophy

and

the practice could be:
Tantra and later maybe Mahamudra or/and Dzogchen.

But a general Buddhist practice is always:
Shine and Lhaktong

Insight in Mahayana is here obtained over the Sutra or/and philosophy.
It is a step by step philosophy which could end in the understanding or rigpa of the never born and always present Natural State / Sugathagarba and further worked out in a Tantric method which must lead to the right next method untill the inherent Buddha is experienced fully aware as present in the here and now.

But Cittamatra belongs to the gradual development to realisation of our inherent Buddha Nature / Natural State, so it must make logical use of other methods like we have abundent in Tantra or Ma Gyud and Pa Gyud.


Best wishes for our individual practice


Mutsog Marro
Kalden yungdrung

[Jnana]

As for what the Vajra-Like Samadhi is, I'll have to get back to ya....

The vajra-like samādhi (vajropamasamādhi) is the meditation which eliminates the remaining cognitive obscurations (jñeyāvaraṇa), which are subtle obscurations (sūkṣmāvaraṇa), on the tenth bodhisattva bhūmi. This results in the complete revolution of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti) and full realization of the dharmakāya which is the attainment of buddhahood. In some sources, such as the Ratnagotravibhāga, the vajra-like samādhi is said to be the meditation employed on the eighth, ninth, and tenth bhūmis.

[kalden yungdrung]

[quote="Yeshe D wrote:
The vajra-like samādhi (vajropamasamādhi) is the meditation which eliminates the remaining cognitive obscurations (jñeyāvaraṇa), which are subtle obscurations (sūkṣmāvaraṇa), on the tenth bodhisattva bhūmi. This results in the complete revolution of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti) and full realization of the dharmakāya which is the attainment of buddhahood. In some sources, such as the Ratnagotravibhāga, the vajra-like samādhi is said to be the meditation employed on the eighth, ninth, and tenth bhūmis.[/quote]


Tashi delek Yeshe D,

Thanks for your replies.

Yes the path of the Bodhisattva can be a long way.
Sometimes i think, why could not this be quicker seen in the light of the fruit.

Questions:
- Which are subtle obscurations here?
- What is meant by the complete revolution of the basis ?
- What is the basis in Cittamatra?
- The meditation employed on the 8th, 9th, and 10th bhūmis. Can you give me a very rough calculation about the duration (human years) to reach the 8th Bodhisattva bhumi?
- For who is this all THE WAY and why?
- What alternative suggestions would there be on this system and for whom would they be excellent?


Best wishes for our practice

Mutsog Marro
Kalden Yungdrung

[Jnana]

Which are subtle obscurations here?

The subtle obscurations to omniscience. These are forever eliminated beginning on the eighth bhūmi.

What is meant by the complete revolution of the basis ?

This has already been addressed. Mahāyānasaṃgraha 9.1: "The bodhisattvas' elimination (prahāṇa) is nonabiding nirvāṇa. Its identity is the revolved basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti), [revolved into] a basis (āśraya) that has eliminated defilement (kleśa) without abandoning saṃsāra.... Revolution (parāvṛtti) is the other-dependent nature when the antidote [to defilements] has occurred and has purged its defiled portion, reducing it to its purified portion."

Also see the Dharmadharmatāvibhāgavṛtti, which explains this in detail. The last part of that explanation can be found in this post.

What is the basis in Cittamatra?

Well, "Cittamatra" is something of a misnomer. Anyway, this has also been addressed. Mahāyānasaṃgraha 9.1: "The basis (āśraya) is the other-dependent nature which comprises both [defiled and purified portions]."

As for your remaining questions, I have no interest in debating the relative merits of gradual systems vs. other path structures.

All the best,

Geoff

[kalden yungdrung]

Tashi delek Yeshe D,

Thanks for your reply.
Will write between the lines

Best wishes for your practice

Mutsog Marro
Kalden Yungdrung

Which are subtle obscurations here?

The subtle obscurations to omniscience. These are forever eliminated beginning on the eighth bhūmi.
What is subtle here? Also did i understand that you wrote:The basis (āśraya) is the other-dependent nature which comprises both [defiled and purified portions]."
Is defiled and purified not based on karma? I guess that you mean here the Alaya Vinjana where all karmic traces are stored?
One of my masters told me that Alaya Vinjana - Vijnjana = Alaya = Kun Zhi = the very base of all which does exist.




[

What is the basis in Cittamatra?

Well, "Cittamatra" is something of a misnomer. Anyway, this has also been addressed. Mahāyānasaṃgraha 9.1: "The basis (āśraya) is the other-dependent nature which comprises both [defiled and purified portions]."
What is in your opinion the better name for Cittamatra?

As for your remaining questions, I have no interest in debating the relative merits of gradual systems vs. other path structures.
Ok that can i understand but it would be great if it could happen. It can broaden our insight etc.
But i accept your rejection.

All the best,

Geoff

[conebeckham]

Kalden Yungdrug-

The "subtle obscurations" is actually a technical term or translation....these are the obscurations to omniscience. The "gross obscurations" are those that need to be eliminated or purified (or whatever!) for liberation from Samsara.